Wright v. Pierce County of the State of Washington

W.D. Washington

Wright v. Pierce County of the State of Washington

DecidedDecember 7, 2022

Docket3:22-cv-05621

StatusUnknown

This text of Wright v. Pierce County of the State of Washington (Wright v. Pierce County of the State of Washington) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Wright v. Pierce County of the State of Washington, (W.D. Wash. 2022).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2 3 4

5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA 9 10 JOSEPH SCOTT WRIGHT, CASE NO. 3:22-cv-05621-LK-JRC 11 Petitioner, ORDER 12 v. 13 PIERCE COUNTY OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, 14 Respondent. 15 16 This is a federal habeas action filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On September 9, 2022, the 17 Court directed service upon respondent and upon the Attorney General of the State of 18 Washington copies of the habeas petition, all documents in support thereof, the order, and the 19 Notice of Option of Consent. See Dkt. 7. In that order the Court directed respondent to file and 20 serve an answer within 45 days after service of the petition. See id. The docket indicates that 21 service was executed upon the Attorney General and the Pierce County Prosecuting Attorney’s 22 Office on September 15 and 16, 2022, respectively. See Dkts. 9, 10. However, to date respondent 23 24 1 has not answered the petition. Therefore, the Court directs respondent to answer the petition on 2 or before December 23, 2022. 3 Further, the Court notes the following. Petitioner names Pierce County as respondent. 4 Dkt. 6. The proper respondent to a habeas petition is the “person who has custody over [the

5 petitioner].” 28 U.S.C. § 2242; see also § 2243; Brittingham v. United States, 982 F.2d 378 (9th 6 Cir. 1992); Dunne v. Henman, 875 F.2d 244, 249 (9th Cir. 1989). The official having custody of 7 petitioner where he is currently confined – Pierce County Jail – is Pierce County Sheriff Ed 8 Troyer. Accordingly, the Clerk is directed to substitute Pierce County Sheriff Ed Troyer as the 9 respondent in this action. If any party believes that Sheriff Troyer is not the proper respondent, 10 the party shall file a motion to substitute the correct respondent. 11 Dated this 7th day of December, 2022. A 12

13 J. Richard Creatura Chief United States Magistrate Judge 14

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

1 2 3 4

5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA 9 10 JOSEPH SCOTT WRIGHT, CASE NO. 3:22-cv-05621-LK-JRC 11 Petitioner, ORDER 12 v. 13 PIERCE COUNTY OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, 14 Respondent. 15 16 This is a federal habeas action filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On September 9, 2022, the 17 Court directed service upon respondent and upon the Attorney General of the State of 18 Washington copies of the habeas petition, all documents in support thereof, the order, and the 19 Notice of Option of Consent. See Dkt. 7. In that order the Court directed respondent to file and 20 serve an answer within 45 days after service of the petition. See id. The docket indicates that 21 service was executed upon the Attorney General and the Pierce County Prosecuting Attorney’s 22 Office on September 15 and 16, 2022, respectively. See Dkts. 9, 10. However, to date respondent 23 24 1 has not answered the petition. Therefore, the Court directs respondent to answer the petition on 2 or before December 23, 2022. 3 Further, the Court notes the following. Petitioner names Pierce County as respondent. 4 Dkt. 6. The proper respondent to a habeas petition is the “person who has custody over [the

5 petitioner].” 28 U.S.C. § 2242; see also § 2243; Brittingham v. United States, 982 F.2d 378 (9th 6 Cir. 1992); Dunne v. Henman, 875 F.2d 244, 249 (9th Cir. 1989). The official having custody of 7 petitioner where he is currently confined – Pierce County Jail – is Pierce County Sheriff Ed 8 Troyer. Accordingly, the Clerk is directed to substitute Pierce County Sheriff Ed Troyer as the 9 respondent in this action. If any party believes that Sheriff Troyer is not the proper respondent, 10 the party shall file a motion to substitute the correct respondent. 11 Dated this 7th day of December, 2022. A 12

13 J. Richard Creatura Chief United States Magistrate Judge 14

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Wright v. Pierce County of the State of Washington, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wright-v-pierce-county-of-the-state-of-washington-wawd-2022.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack